Hancock's married to an African woman. Don't be critical of Donnelly until you read both his books. His work was phenomenal for the time and for an arm chair historian. He was talking about impact, being laughed at and lol and behold....modern science.
I hereby promise the Great Spirit Lucifer, Prince of Demons, that each year I will bring unto him a human soul to do with as it may please him, and in return Lucifer promises to bestow upon me the treasures of the earth and fulfil my every desire for the length of my natural life. If I fail to bring him each year the offering specified above, then my own soul shall be forfeit to him. Signed..... {Invocant signs pact with his own blood}[88] This passage is from Manly Palmer Hall's The Secret Teachings of All Ages
I would counter that we do, it is just being thrown at things it should not be in addition to bureaucratic hold-ups that are unnecessary as a rule. Sure there will be local cultural concerns in some places, but I would wager that compromises of some kind could be found. But the money is there. We could also save a ton if locals had training and could volunteer for some kind of the work.
My counter: tell a bunch of bored college dudes that you'll give them shovels, pizza, and booze if they go dig a big hole in the sand. If anyone tries to stop you, give the lads some arms to assert dominance. I'm not out here to listen to "rules" and "laws" - not even sure what "property rights" means - I'm here to find truth, and anyone who impedes that quest is an agent of the Demiurge and probably a lizard.
@stephjezo6470 It matters the area of study and country. The eastern US has more funding because it goes to revolutionary war, funding fathers, and civil war related sites (usually supported more by private funding). As you go west US, funding is not there because there is a more recent past of the art world exploiting Native American artifacts and the idea that the west was either too bloody or to sanitized via Hollywood cowboys.
A proper scientist has a theory, looks at the evidence and changes his theory depending on that evidence. A scientist that doesn't change his mind isn't a proper scientist.
Theories are pretty sat in stone (often literally considering fossils are used) and need evidence to refute, what you're thinking of, that requires evidence, is a hypothesis. Which is what Graham Hancock has and has barely moved on in the last 4 decades
@@ShrexyGuy what evidence does he have? He has speculations and a flair for the dramatic. WoOOoo a lost ancient civilization. Where's the evidence? Göbleki Tepe? Sphinx? Bimini road? I don't get it. I
Id disagree as he started with the "he is a racist and uses theories that have been put down....etc". An attempt was made but it felt biased from the start.
He says other people consider him a racist? And to point out he uses theories in his book that come from a guy who may have had some white supremacy ideals is just stating facts
@@gaynorhamilton4571agreed, there is plenty of bias in this critique. Very much biased on the side of the establishment. Not very persuaded, but no doubt Hancock gets over his skis from time to time, but I think his general thesis and many of his points are well documented. I feel like grahams show is nowhere near his best work either.
I got my Wendussy Hunter hat in the mail today. My better half said she didn't understand, so I called her a skinwalker and then I watched this episode. Best day ever.
A real story from archeological excavation site i worked at as a student. We started to dig in a place where something came out on non invasive test. I don't remember what the method was but It showed some shadows that you could say may be sth made of metal so we opened a dig site there. Yeah... it was a shit-ton of horseradish. Welcome to archeology.
Wait, someone buried a bunch of horseradish? How old was the horseradish? How intact was it? Where was this, local climate? So many questions, this is fascinating.
A shit ton of horseradish is even weirder to be underground than a bunch of metal. I feel like it raises more questions than if you had found a bunch of sheet metal.
Guys it was like a feet under the surface, maybe half a meter. It was just wild horseradish, it grew there, but produced an anomaly that was needed to check. It was just this, nothing special, nothing mysterious, just a wild growing horseradish near a small mound in the middle of nowhere (quite scenic middle of nowhere, yet still middle of nowhere :P)
So impressed with your pronunciation. I only listen and read on these topics. Then when I try to talk about them, I realize I can’t pronounciate sheet. No matter how many times I practice in my head.
I have watched Ancient Apocalypse by myself and then watched Milo's critique of it, so seeing your perspective is very instructive. Can't wait for Part 2
Milo's coverage was so fun and insightful. He didn't bring up the history of Hancock being slandered though, which definitely informs why the man is so against mainstream. Lots of layers to this situation, and I'm glad Lore Lodge brought up that surrounding context to continue the conversation.
@@mykjones2 His coverage was also, very openly, a pure sensationalized flame-storm. Milo fully stated as such in the finale, and expressed dissatifaction with that form of content. It's totally fine to not like his coverage, but to call it terrible is taking it as something it isn't. Biased, feel free. Terrible? That one is up to taste considering it was intended as a bashing not a critique.
In relation to the underwater pilars, there is some fascinating stuff on certain types of Coral, that grow into metal rich stone at the molecular level and erode it away, which were in the same family tree as the coral that was on these pilars. The conditions and temperature of this water, with the timeline we're assuming with meltwater pulse 1B, it's totally possible those were pilars that have just become coral now. I'm not sure the right way to know for sure, but it definitely muddies the water on what we already know. Even inorganic matter will be consumed by the sea in scarily fast timescales.
I was thinking something like this when he mentioned the coral.. I mean what is coral but life that archors down and feeds away at shit. Both from minerals in the water and what they're on, kind of like fungi. So what if the underwater pillares were just down there so long and it was such a good meal for the coral where they just had to eat away at it and leave us with nothing. What if there were more pillars buried in the sea floor away from things that would eat it away.. Just a thought.
Anyone who has ever kept a saltwater aquarium can definitively say, certain corals can be extremely invasive. I had the same train of thought when hearing the columns were coral throughout; perhaps the coral grew around another structure that has since eroded away or been consumed by the invertebrates.
My thought on the coral columns was 'huh, I wonder if coral can completely absorb the structure it's growing on and if that would explain the shape of this particular coral'. I wonder if there are examples of coral elsewhere that are in this shape or if there's a way to find out from the coral itself what things it...( ate..? absorbed?) in its lifetime.
The fact that the Titanic couldn't be raised after 100 years for preservation's a good testament to this fact. They tried to finally get it uncovered fully, but the moment any bit of it touched the air, it literally disintegrated. It's why that area's an International Ban Zone for anyone trying to look at it or loot or anything. Let the dead rest.
This was a surprisingly fair critique of the subject matter. I'm relatively new to the channel, so I'm just not used to a lot of objectivity when it comes to stuff like this. It seems like a vast majority of people are too often cheerleaders for their chosen side, and cease to think critically or objectively about anything not coming from their team, so to speak. I guess what I'm saying is I'm really glad i found this channel, late though i am to the party.
I surely didn't expect Cholula to show up in the video. I used to ride my bike to the Cholula Pyramid every day. Yes, the pyramid just looks like a hill but they got tunnels that were digged a long time ago where you can still see the original pyramid blocks and murals. It's weird that not many know or care about this structure!
Archaeological projects over in the Near East seem to get the majority of the interest, it’s unfortunate because it’s a lot to do with assumptions about Native American cultures being younger due to the Clovis First dogma.
The most annoying thing when this came out was people taking any angle to say "you disagree with ---? Then you're one of them and you dont want people to know they're right."
Everything is racist, EVERYTHING. In today's world according to Democrats/liberals EVERYTHING is racist. Never forget this, if you do, well then you are racist.
All I can day about Atlantis is, Troy was once considered an allegory until it was found. Babylon was considered a myth until it was found. Sodom and Gomorrah were considered fictional until they were recently discovered.
@Vitaly Vakhteev not conclusively, no. There is a theory that the sites of Bab edh-Dhra and Numiera correspond to the biblical Sodom and Gomorrah. Another possible location is Tall el-Hammam. A few others have been proposed as well through history, but none of them have been definitively confirmed to be Sodom or Gomorrah.
@limepierre1671 there is a general consesus considering they are where they were said to be. The only thing truly disputed is whether or not there was an impact that destroyed them. Early signs show yes. Its crazy to me the more people in the West move away from religion the more we find that alot of the bible is actually quite historical. Atlantis i think was a full civilization not a single city. It represents pre-flood civilization and most the sites dating that old are impressive compared to up until the bronze age.
@@SamtheIrishexan there is most definitely not a concensus, general or otherwise. Numerous sites have been proposed over the years, none have been widely accepted as being either Sodom or Gomorrah. More people accept the impact theory for Tall el-Hamman than the suggestion that out was the site of Sodom, because we have physical evidence of an impact event taking place there while the evidence for it being Sodom is that if you don't think about it too hard and push really hard on the pieces it sort of resembles a badly remembered biblical event.
I've actually pushed the idea of crowdfunding dig sites - they really need to monetize it and have people pay for archeology vacations where they come to help dig. Would require regulations and oversight to keep artifacts safe but could allow shovels for hire which is really what is needed
One problem is that just going to town with shovels is not very good “digging.” It’s very regimented, meticulous, and incredibly boring most of the time. The average tourist attempting to help might well hinder or destroy important work.
I'm willing to crowdfund archaeology expeditions for things like these; though I imagine tourists would only break artefacts and bother the archaeologists.
Holy moly... Id really really love now for you squared Aidan to make another podcast with Milo so you three could talk about it more, now when you did so much research no topic, as last time you had him as a guest you decided to not talk about stuff you know not that much about with is very commendable and i respect you so much because of all your integrity. Great video man as always, ill finish it tomorrow... I knew i couldnt do it today but had to click it anyhow, as always. Keep up the great work. You really make my days shine with excitement.
I think what is most interesting about his hypothesis, at its the basest level, is that it's built from the idea that there are huge blindspots in archaeology. As someone who studied anthropology and archaeology, lots of the big tenents of those disciplines aren't questioned, when they really should be constantly evolving as our understandings evolve. (Imo alot of those tenents are built on weird assumptions based on "modern" ideas of gender and religion, which traps them in a very narrow box of interpretations...) Not to mention, to say that a culture was able to slip through the cracks doesnt seem out of the realm of possibility given that small percentage of the earth that we have studied and the specific circumstances that must exist for achaeological artifacts and sites to be preserved. Does this mean that all the conclusions Hancock extrapolates outward from his study are a more complete or perfect explaination, not really. But I dont think that questioning the status quo of human history is something we shouldn't be doing.
Don't know if anyone has said this yet and i know you haven't watched any of Milo's videos on ancient apocalypse yet but Milo does address graham being banned from serpent mound, turns out Graham Hancock was not banned from there, he just wasn't allowed to film there, what really happened was Graham requested for four days commercial filming at serpent mound and the people In charge of serpent mound didn't like the idea of a large film crew running around their important historical site for four days so they denied his request, he totally could have gone there whenever he wanted, he just couldn't bring his film crew.
thats the only research milo did for the entire set of videos. He is another example of archeology completely ignoring the actual evidence in favor of just attacking graham. I am far from agreeing with everything graham says but there are so many bad facts and weird coincidences and ignored evidence that its really frustrating.
Milo is very type A competitive and saw Hancock garnering attention so jumped on the band wagon for some attention prostitution. He's a smart guy but he's too young and too heavily indoctrinated to actually take any more serious than your local librarian.
@@mykjones2My dude what, half of what evidence graham used was found through improperly using a test like carbon dating on rocks (that's not how carbon dating works) or complete speculation
Since Plato was discussing a thirdhand travel story that took place thousands of years in the past, I think we should take it as an allegory, no matter how shiny a theory it is.
The term "Atlantis" is usually used to describe a general theory of a lost civilization, rather than a literal belief in Plato's story as hard fact. Atlantis-like flood/catastrophe stories are a global phenomenon, but Plato's account is the best known and most often quoted. Having said that, Plato himself did insist that this particular story was not mere allegory but had the advantage of being based on something real. He goes to great lengths to explain that the sinking of Atlantis was not an isolated event, but a single example of a series of catastrophes that had befallen humanity, resulting a series of "restarts" for the development of civilization. The example of Doggerland (a very real lost continent within relatively recent times) springs to mind.
I think what's important to remember is he doesn't need to be 100% right. He could be 10% right and its still a big discovery. His first episodes, Malta, and the turkey sites are his best
Idk how accurate hancocks claims are, however that same thought applies to mainstream and alternative science as well. We have such a gap in our knowledge of the past that it would foolish and arrogant of any of us to assume we can definitively state the truth of what existed or occured in those MASSIVE chunks of time in history that we have little to no record of. All I know is that the findings that are constantly being unearthed are throwing all kinds of wrenches into all kinds of established theories and I genuinely believe our history books are more innacurate than anybody would care to admit.
There are so many in STEM fields in content creation lacking your balanced critical analysis. It's much appreciated to find a content creator with an approach like this. Well done sir.
Schliemann blew up Troy. I’ve been there. He excavated using dynamite. The entire landscape as far as the eye can see is pocked by holes from dynamite.
The chamber under Gunung Padang is way less mysterious than Graham may think. The thing is, that hill is an extinct volcano, and so there are going to be lava tubes and lava chambers that may look like man-made structures on a GPR. I support excavating there, but the overwhelming possibility is that this is a feature of geologic interest, not anthropological (my undergrad was dual poli/earth science and my grad program focused on disaster preparedness and hardening). Also, most of Gunung Padang is natural, despite the strange shape of the columnar jointing. If you want to see a giant version of that sort of natural structure, look up the "Devil's Tower" (seen in Close Encounters of a Third Kind). Humans may have moved the columns around, but there was very little alteration of the natural materials present in that site.
Exactly. Humans built someone on the volcano - it is cool they did so; but they didn't build the mountain itself. They took advantage of the columnar basalt on the mountain.
What you are saying is nonsense. This is not anything like Devils tower. It's a man made structure, that is over 25,000 years old. That is just how it is.
@@jamesn.economou9922 That would be cool - how are they getting to a 25K years ago date? There is no method for dating when stone was cut or laid, organic matter can be dated, but the vast majority of organic matter isn't indicative of human activity. Have archeologist (or whoever is excavating the site) found hearths, or post molds that can be dated? I know that the ground penetrating radar indicates some voids in the mountain. But the mountain is a volcano, so lava tubes or extinct magma chambers would be expected. I don't think any attempt has been made to dig down to these voids. Unfortunately their shapes do not indicate human activity - ground penetrating radar isn't very high res. Without more data it is impossible to say. I'm sure they are collecting more data on this site. Currently I think the 25K data is a little extreme. The current date for human activity on Gunung Padang about 1,500 years ago. No doubt there were people there earlier doing their thing. But were they members of a global "advanced civilization" so far, no evidence of that that I've seen.
Graham Hancock is really smart and has made many discoveries including the Bosnian pyramid. I don’t agree with everything he has to say but he’s at least asking the right questions. Most in his field shut out those same questions, close their eyes and put their fingers in their ears.
Thank you so much for making these kinds of videos. I can't stand people that sit there and only make attacks on character it's insufferable. You actually go out of your way to find whatever facts are available and I love that.
This was a breath of fresh air. Milo, as smart as he is, is far too type A and (proudly) heavily indoctrinated in order to take any more serious than a Google search. He's got the right textbook answer and he can back it as long as you don't ask serious questions that he can't find a way to mock 😂 Cool guy though, he's got fire!
@@brettkilian9855Like the "research and evidence" that created the dogma behind Clovis first and literally took finding 22,000 year old footprints in a layer of stone in New Mexico that they couldn't argue against to admit they were stupid?? Modern "archeology" is unable to deal with anything that doesn't fit the narrative they push - no matter how unfulfilling or ludicrous their narrative happens to be. Hancock may be wrong on a lot of things, but at least he doesn't get his ideas from book worms who've rarely left their university and have no practical real world experience.
@@brettkilian9855 from consuming a lot of his work in the last year after watching this very same video, Hancock comes across, at least in my opinion, just as much as asking questions as he is making definitive claims, especially with just how much he's changed his approach through the decades, some of the questions are kind of stupid, sure, and the claims are outlandish, and Hancock certainly comes across as full of himself and slightly patronizing at times, but why do academic archaeologist have a right to be that way and the dude doesn't?
Unfortunately those billionaires are in special clubs of people who like to withhold knowledge from common folk it would make it much harder to control the populace if they knew about there past basically keep us docile especially now with so many inventions like the tv and the internet now they can control the mind completely
Yay to the message about education over trying to sound cool by dragging someone else down while your only explanation is "why?because". It's a relatively common sight in articles which is frankly sad, having the writers waste less time on coming up with ways to call someone names for an opinion that hurts nobody and instead put that time towards explaining exactly why they think that opinion isn't accurate would make finding a good article so much easier.
"Get your act together" Precisely. I don't know a single history professional who agrees on every single thing. it's the way you end up in a church, everyone OVERALL agrees. But I guarantee every single one of them has a specific experience or hypothesis about how religion actually functions and that personal paradigm has them thinking some really odd, but specific things compared to what everyone else nods over. Was Judas a bad guy? Manipulated by fate? That alone can split entire congregations in a weaker religion. Science is no different. Personal theories, pet ideas, and word of mouth creates bias, and eventually the weight is enough to pull the whole cart over.
As an amateur archaeologist (college trained, w/o finishing my degree), I think Hancock asks all of the right questions. I think he jumps to a lot of conclusions that can be easily disputed. In the end, the idea of older civilizations isn't far-fetched or even hard to believe in. More and more evidence keeps showing up. All we can reasonably expect from the scientific community is honest exploration into ideas and diligent evaluation of evidence (both physical and mythological).
Every one has intelligent opinions on your video, all I have to say is thank you for not obnoxiously sipping coffee every time you start a point, thank you for not talking down to the viewers and thank you for talking in a non rushed/yelling manner. I think every one knows who’s 3 part video I’m talking about
Brilliant video, love the look into the meta aspects of what went on with these researchers. Things like funding and politics don't occur to me when I read about archeology but they have a big impact on the field
Science isn't the pursuit of truth, it is the pursuit of funding. Even scientists have to eat and pay bills, so they get results that please the people who give them grants. Sad but true.
I’m a pretty new follower, but this is fast becoming my favorite channel to watch. I’m low-key addicted to good storytelling and folklore - as in, I’m the only person I’ve ever met who geeks out over Zecharia Sitchin’s translations, even if they’re hard to read. Those Sumerian gods were an absolute font of storytelling material and I cannot get enough. And the crossovers into pretty much every middle eastern culture that followed - including all the abrahamic traditions - it’s just magic! So finding this channel with such a strong grasp on the art of good storytelling is just a breath of fresh air ♥️
Thank you for covering this. Ive been fascinated by Hancocks theory for a couple years now, i actually read his recent book Magicians of the Gods, and until the Netflix show, I never heard anyone talk about Hancock or the theory except on Joe Rogan.
Archeology in Mexico is neither cheap or safe anymore. There are reasons many north American archeologists don't touch it. Most of us don't want to deal with the corruption and cartels
If the government would regulate, decriminalize and/or Legalize drugs the cartels would become unemployed and powerless, solving this issue along with countless others…..
People don't realize how expensive that really is not only to get there get workers get all the paperwork from the government start a dig get harassed by the cartel pay them off only to repeat a month later while you have to pay all the archeologists paleontologists and all the workers and for security or the cartel it adds up fast unfortunately 😢
The underground structure in Indonesia needs to be explored, its like finding an unmolested version of the great pyramid with all its interior and mysteries intact. Its insane that things like that aren't persued, are these people not curious or are they actively trying to hide something?
His main genesis of interest in ancient oral traditions and the validity of legends was his time spent as a journalist covering a story in Ethiopia. While there, he was told of the local belief that the Ethiopian church possess the ark of the covenant. The same oldest church still active which continues to includes the original apocryphal Texts in it's bible like the book of Enoch and others, unlike the other Christian churches that removed them at the council of nicea. This was worth investigating deeper to Mr Hancock and led to other unorthodox research that counters the mainstream narratives of our history of civilization.
Hancock's wife, who he dearly loves is brown and he has mixed raced children. Anyone who entertains the idea that he's racist for even a minute needs to pull their head out
sorry, but bad argument. J.D. Vance, the american republican vice presidential candidate is a total religious white nationalist, but his wife is from...india i believe, and all his children are of course mixed. Not saying hankock is racist, just saying your argument is bad.
@@dyamonde9555 how is my argument bad? What tf does JD Vance have to do with Graham Hancock? Racist people don't fall in love, marry and make babies with the people they're accused of hating. Hancock gives Kudos to his wife every speech. If you're trying to compare Hancock to Vance you've been on the Internet WAY too long and need to unplug & take a walk
@@GreenTea3699 i made very clear that i was not saying that hancock is racist. i said that JD Vance, a clear racists, also very clearly married an ethnic woman and had kids with her. So simply having an ethnic wife and kids is no indicator if someone is or is not a racist, thus your argument is invalid.
@@GreenTea3699 my only issue is that you dont understand how argumentation and counterpoints work. Your original argument does not work because your fact does not indicate your conclusion. Vance is simply my counter-example to showcase this. If you still don't understand what i'm trying to say here i can not help you.
I've been at it for about 40 years. I've seen academics claim credit for stuff they ridiculed as nonsense many times over during that time. The rabbit hole has no bottom because it is still under construction and always will be!
Ya. It does not help that most high schools that have textbooks from 30-50 years ago and some of the finer points are wrong or misleading causing confusion when people talk about history and archeological with the people that are updated on history and archeological
It was never about his specific ideas he put forth but the fact he puts forth the idea of not just blindly believing the experts, because that is inherently bad science.
Remember, truth and accuracy have no meaning when you can call someone names and falsely attack their character...lol...you hit the nail on the head...AGAIN!!! Love your videos and your presentation! Keep it rollin guys!
Last I remember I was taught that do to nutrition and the amount of food available, we have grown in height. Is it possible that the Giants having knowledge of farming, were better fed and just grew to something closer to modern height?
Ive always thought their was a pre history that either isnt known or isnt spoken about. 1. Inca walls built on foundations that are a lot older with no knowledge of when or who built them, they are massive and workmanship unsurpassed in engineering. 2. Inca walls that are made from differnt shape solid blocks of stone that all fit individually together with at the end of one of the walls the rock has liquified as if somehow these wall builders melted with some extreme heat technique the massive stones together.
Yes that's exactly what it looks like happened. I can't see how they could get stone's of that size up there. Just can't see primitive tools doing such work. It may never be known. Fascinating
Since Atlantis is mentioned, I am going to propose a new theory: Plato created the story of Atlantis through stories such as the flood which could have originated when lands in Meospotamia were flooded at the end of the ice age, hence the idea of a lost land that was flooded.
except we know that plato was made aware of the story of atlantis from solon , who had heard it directly from elders in the egypt area. plato has never once been known to fabricate storys either. perhaps atlantis is an alegory for a great many coastal cities which were submerged when the water level rose by 130 meters in a matter of years ,around 11,600 years ago. we find evidence of the cities all the time of the coasts of japan, cuba, india and on and on
It's more likely based on the minoan eruption event, that destroyed the Island of Thera (circa 1600BC) and may have been one of the main contributors to the Bronze Age collapse.
@@mainsource8030 What Graham Hancock often omits on the intro of Ancient Apocalypse is that the story of Atlantis isn't even a first hand account from Plato. The story is narrated by his fictional character named Critias. This omission puts way more historical credit in the story than it's due, since Graham makes it seem that Plato himself is relaying the story, not a fictional character.
@@ne0nmancer Critias was not a fictional character but was a politician from 5 century BC whose linage is well documented, your omission of this basic research would suggest you have never read Plato's original account. Critias's grandson is the Ciritias from Plato's account recounting a story his grandfather had told him came from Solon. It does not make the story true but do not make up facts to support your ideas
If people are interested in Hancock's work, I deeply recommend his appearances on Joe Rogan together with Randall Carlson. Joe is obviously a big fan and he lets them have plenty of space to go into incredible details. They also did a debate with Michael Shermer who is a skeptic, and I think it's very good content. The Netflix series was a disappointment to me, because it reminded me more of those History Channel Ancient Alien episodes where they focused on creating hype instead of documenting their ideas. The Joe Rogan episodes are superior in my opinion, whether you agree with him or not.
They will need to get someone MUCH more familiar with that folklore to guest with them, IMO. I think it would be really cool if they had someone on the podcast and maybe cover some specific ~ nuance~ that isn't obvious in translation.
It has come out the serpent mound people only told Grant no, because he wanted to film for 4 days and they felt it would cause too much of a disruption. Graham has not given evidence that they didn't like his view being the true was the true reason that I could find. Watch miniminuteman or Stefan Milo's on ancient apocalypse they both talk about it.
I feel like a lot of the archeological community just are there to preserve a narrative. They dont want to be wrong. Which seems like mafness as archeology is about exploration and finding new knowledge which of course will change our preexisting notions again and again. Isnt tgat what learning and science is?. People thought the earth was flat.. science changed ( ignoring flat earthers ) .. it changed.. we learned.. we grew
The problem with Hancock is that he starts with his conclusion and only goes looking for evidence that supports it while ignoring (or reinterperating in his favor) evidence that contradicts it. That's why he's correct about some stuff while being wildly wrong about other things.
absolutely this! I would even argue that this same methodology has plagued archaeology for years, and is only recently changing. it's fine to have a question, but you can't really start with an answer, unless you are actively seeking all evidence that proves your idea either right or wrong.
Giants might just be a matter of perspective. An advanced civilization would have likely had better more consistent nourishment than a group of of hunter-gathers who would be more likely to deal with famine. Regular famine makes groups of people smaller while consistent nutrient rich foods and good health care generally makes people taller.
I thought I’d say, this is a very credible video. I like the laidback feel of your videos but this genuinely seemed like it was made by a professional (as you claim to be). Kudos.
Being allowed to dig around areas with great historical/cultural significance is a priviledge not a right. Historically a lot of destruction has been done by archeologists and film crews
Except that their statement specifically referred to Grahams beliefs/theories, in addition to such things as film crews. The latter might be a concern and steps can be done to mitigate such, the former is intolerable and has no place within a discourse.
@@darklelouchg8505 they didn't allow it for both reasons and both reasons are valid. It's an ancient burial mound, you treat those with respect and if you don't then you don't get the privilege of going there. I think most people would be pretty unhappy about people going to their family cemetery and making a documentary about how it was actually the cemetery atlantas, that isn't respectful
I was an Anthropology student specifically studying to do archaeology, because we’ve lumped it in with Anthropology as a field. And they crushed my dreams. I love archaeology, and I still love the authentic work that comes from it. But today’s archaeologists in the US are hypocritical and elitist, they sacrifice the truth for political narratives, and shoot themselves in the feet constantly. (The anthropologists I studied under even literally taught false information.) Even when they are correct about a hypothesis being wrong, they say so in the vilest, most destructive ways. Just so people don’t think I’m kooky like they also think Hancock is, I wrote a paper on a discredited hypothesis suggesting the existence of an additional land path over ice that Stone Age people could have crossed from Europe into North America. I read the reports and the counter arguments, and it ultimately *did* appear to be incorrect, but the fucking archaeologists sperged out angrily as if no one should dare think such things, and *also* claimed racism too. I did some lab work cleaning bulk samples and had to listen to other students laugh at Hancock, AND call him a white supremacist, AND suggest he deserved to be punched, TO OUR PROFESSOR, who just laughed and passively agreed. They bitched all the time how they didn’t get enough funding and weren’t taken seriously as a science. Maybe they should act like scientists first to deserve it. They aren’t scientists. They’re activists and aristocrats.
Remember a sociology class I took. There was a paper due on "environmental racism", the practice of shuffling off undesired minorities to the worst places to live, one of the key examples being Flint Michigan's undrinkable water. The professor was disgusted when I presented him with the objective data that showed that poor water quality--charitably defined as those with worse water quality than Flint, were almost entirely, north of 80%, were disproportionately white compared to the national racial breakdown according the the, at the time, brand new census.
@kilbert666 Many historians and scientists don't care about the truth anymore, they care about funding and following the popular narrative. It also annoys me how much American politics in specific effect the treatment of history.
@@kilbert666 Oh, no. You're getting hung up on real data instead of forwarding this week's popular propaganda. I don't think you'll make it in academia.
I truly wish I could like this video twice! The whole reason I watch your channel can be summed up in the last 10 minutes of this video. GO GET 'EM! hahaha. Great video, glad I watched it. Can't wait to see part 2.
My son found something strange, something that shouldn’t have been therein a stream in Northern Kentucky when he was about five years old, flooding may explain it, over the years it disappeared, stolen? Anyway we also found some weird fossils, Aiden, you remind me of him, I believe y’all would be friends, he and his brother both have insatiable appetites for learning, thanks so very much for giving me a way to learn more about my world, take care…
46:39 did Graham actually say the great pyramid is a tomb? This is suprising to me because iirc he was the first person to bring it to my attention that there is almost no evidence to support it being a tomb.
I know where you are coming from with your comment- I began to question all my accepted beliefs that were being validated by modern scientific methods when I considered that my Dad's medical conditions were producing "affirmative" results in blood tests, but not the underlying causes. Lots of blood tranfusions to treat the symptoms. Myelodysplastic Syndrome basically was failure of the red bood cells to mature to functional levels before being released into the blood stream. The science does 'catch up' but most of us ordinary folk usually opt to wear dust masks on account of we give up on speculating about what mainstream science doesn't yet know.
I am a Hancock fan and i felt that this was a very fair analysis of his work. Hancock is open to discussions. Maybe you could reach out to him and have him on the show?
Archaeology is turning out to be similar to medical science. Go against the legacy beliefs and they will handle open minds with “show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.”
Hey, love your videos. Just one thing I wanted to note: meso American pyramids were commonly built upon older pyramids...it seemed to be standard practice. I remember seeing the layers when I visited said pyramid as a kid.
Minute Milo or whatever his name is? I hate that dude. He comes off as "what I say is right don't research or try to prove me wrong" kind of a hindrance to the scientific method.
The few shorts I've seen about miniminuteman in his analysis of Hancock's claims has used a lot of insults and he has a very unlikable attitude. I don't think milo could handle a debate with any sort of professionalism.
@@trustworthydan fr Milo believes his 4 years of university automatically make him more qualified than someone who’s spent 30 years of his life researching this topic, visiting the sites in person, and talking to professionals about the subject. He’s charismatic but is the definition of an appeal to authority
Could be that Tuatha de Dannan were the last members of the precursors that survive the Great Flood. And they were the last "people" who wielded magic?
He's a racist but has a black wife. Gotta love how people can't stand opinions any more. If someone has a different opinion on a subject, attack them! If you're not intelligent enough to debate an issue, just call them a racist or a phobic.
The whole "what the academy knew" section is whats turned me off of history and mythology, it seems these days people are more focuesed on pushing their personal beliefs about history, rather than what is true. There is this sence of superiority I get from a lot of historians these days, they think that the work of them and their peers is worth more than that of others, it's also funny how they call Graham a white supremacist, while ignoring completely the archaeological work of a south asian man.
My problem with graham Hancock is that, even though, statistically, he could be correct about what he’s saying, he provides no evidence for his claims and chooses to side with them anyway, instead of the more widely accepted narrative which is far more substantiated. It’s not about wanting to suppress this non conformist thinker or anything, it’s just that the widely accepted narrative is widely accepted because we have overwhelming evidence in favor of it, whilst the ancient apocalypse narrative has circumstantial evidence at best
Dude...he's not an archeologist. Its not his job to go out and find evidence. Graham will be the first to tell you that he's a writer and a journalist. He's looking at evidence and making hypotheses. It's the science establishment that won't consider them even though they're often wrong about things. The "widely accepted narrative" has been proven to either be wrong or severely lacking.
Newly found your channel- binging and enjoying it so far! Everything I see about Hancock is either bashing him, or agreeing with everything he says. One extreme or the other. It’s refreshing to see a fair, unbiased (and thoroughly researched) view of this subject. People don’t have to be right, or wrong about everything .
Milo, or Miniminuteman actually went through all of his points. Check out his 4 part series about the actual evidence that's brought up. Graham Hamcock also wasn't entirely banned from the site, he just wasn't allowed to film there.
The accusations are based on the fact that a legend claimed a south american god had a very biblical style beard that natives don't usually have. So that implied that this mythical figure was from another ethnic group not native to American continent.
Ah yes. The giants are thought to have had red hair and fair skin, and the annunaki (ancient aliens) are supposed to be who the giants are. At least one Pharoah they DNA tested had red hair and fair skin
Once upon a time science and academics had the humbleness to accept we don't know everything and studying was an ongoing infinite process and knowledge was fluid. Now, they are like medieval church screaming heresy every time a new idea or discovery comes about.
If you have not i very strongly urge you to watch miniminuteman's breakdown of ancient apocalypse for a detailed and frankly quite entertaining look at Hancock from an archeological perspective
An issue with the narrative itself that is proposed in this situation is ; the falsification process. A proper scientifically trained team of individuals would attempt this before presentation of their ideas to the scientific community as they'll be doing this as well for peer review. This not being part of the whole process with Graham's hypothesis is it's Achilles' heel. Among other things and skipping parts doesn't add legitimacy to the story he's trying to tell realistically. Its a neat idea, one that needs alot of work to flesh out. As it goes unnoticed by the viewers because we're ignorant to aspects that go on behind the scenes that lead to independent sources agreeing or not with these conclusion and concepts. An improperly formed hypothesis won't survive the storm of peer review. Perhaps we won't ever know but, it's definitely interesting.
The diatribe about that Alex Griffin hack was absolutely amazing and took the whole video to the next level. Alex Griffin is an absolute zilch who was so obviously pandering to his group for approval that it was sickening. I hope he fails unless he expands his mindset and focuses more on actually doing his job.
Get a 14-day free trial with my sponsor Aura and see where your personal information is being sold online: aura.com/lore
do they know...? i hope they know. . . . . 0,o
Hancock's married to an African woman.
Don't be critical of Donnelly until you read both his books. His work was phenomenal for the time and for an arm chair historian. He was talking about impact, being laughed at and lol and behold....modern science.
I hereby promise the Great Spirit Lucifer, Prince of Demons, that each year I will bring unto him a human soul to do with as it may please him, and in return Lucifer promises to bestow upon me the treasures of the earth and fulfil my every desire for the length of my natural life. If I fail to bring him each year the offering specified above, then my own soul shall be forfeit to him. Signed..... {Invocant signs pact with his own blood}[88]
This passage is from Manly Palmer Hall's The Secret Teachings of All Ages
Any guarantee that Aura ALSO won't be selling the data and not just trying to limit competition?
@@hirotakasugi4891 you’d have to take a look at their privacy policy
Like my archaeology lecturer said on so many projects being important: I wish we had the funding to dig.
I would counter that we do, it is just being thrown at things it should not be in addition to bureaucratic hold-ups that are unnecessary as a rule. Sure there will be local cultural concerns in some places, but I would wager that compromises of some kind could be found. But the money is there. We could also save a ton if locals had training and could volunteer for some kind of the work.
@@stephjezo6470 What do you mean saving by local "volunteering", Free labour from the locals to save the Buck? That's exploitation
My counter: tell a bunch of bored college dudes that you'll give them shovels, pizza, and booze if they go dig a big hole in the sand.
If anyone tries to stop you, give the lads some arms to assert dominance.
I'm not out here to listen to "rules" and "laws" - not even sure what "property rights" means - I'm here to find truth, and anyone who impedes that quest is an agent of the Demiurge and probably a lizard.
@@DISTurbedwaffle918 x''D
gud stoff
@stephjezo6470 It matters the area of study and country. The eastern US has more funding because it goes to revolutionary war, funding fathers, and civil war related sites (usually supported more by private funding). As you go west US, funding is not there because there is a more recent past of the art world exploiting Native American artifacts and the idea that the west was either too bloody or to sanitized via Hollywood cowboys.
A proper scientist has a theory, looks at the evidence and changes his theory depending on that evidence.
A scientist that doesn't change his mind isn't a proper scientist.
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 this is the most important note to take from all of this.
Which is exactly what archeologists do.
Hancocks theories are stupid. Stop listening to that weird journalist.
Theories are pretty sat in stone (often literally considering fossils are used) and need evidence to refute, what you're thinking of, that requires evidence, is a hypothesis. Which is what Graham Hancock has and has barely moved on in the last 4 decades
@@ShrexyGuy what evidence does he have? He has speculations and a flair for the dramatic. WoOOoo a lost ancient civilization. Where's the evidence? Göbleki Tepe? Sphinx? Bimini road?
I don't get it.
I
I really appreciate that you've made an effort to consider Hancock seriously, and critiqued him properly
Id disagree as he started with the "he is a racist and uses theories that have been put down....etc". An attempt was made but it felt biased from the start.
He says other people consider him a racist? And to point out he uses theories in his book that come from a guy who may have had some white supremacy ideals is just stating facts
@@gaynorhamilton4571 sounds like you’re the biased one
@@loganalvarez2985 His wife is black. You don't marry a black woman if you have "white supremacist ideals".
@@gaynorhamilton4571agreed, there is plenty of bias in this critique. Very much biased on the side of the establishment. Not very persuaded, but no doubt Hancock gets over his skis from time to time, but I think his general thesis and many of his points are well documented. I feel like grahams show is nowhere near his best work either.
I got my Wendussy Hunter hat in the mail today. My better half said she didn't understand, so I called her a skinwalker and then I watched this episode. Best day ever.
“And then everybody clapped” (complimentary)
@@VultureSkins He's so corpo with this community I love it ! Of course I'd have clapped !
You better clap your partner in that hat.
@@beneficent2557 When soy guzzlers say "partner" they mean either "their mom/ or someone they completely imagined".
@@muffin1119stop talking about who u do on weekends. That’s NASTY. Ain’t nobody ask u tell us that. 💀
"Where on the doll did the scary atlantis-man touch you?" Shouldnt have made me laugh as hard as it did lol
A real story from archeological excavation site i worked at as a student. We started to dig in a place where something came out on non invasive test. I don't remember what the method was but It showed some shadows that you could say may be sth made of metal so we opened a dig site there. Yeah... it was a shit-ton of horseradish. Welcome to archeology.
Wait, someone buried a bunch of horseradish? How old was the horseradish? How intact was it? Where was this, local climate? So many questions, this is fascinating.
This is why I believe Hancock is delusional.
@@mikesanders8621 that's exactly why you should believe him and not the traditional archeologists
A shit ton of horseradish is even weirder to be underground than a bunch of metal. I feel like it raises more questions than if you had found a bunch of sheet metal.
Guys it was like a feet under the surface, maybe half a meter. It was just wild horseradish, it grew there, but produced an anomaly that was needed to check. It was just this, nothing special, nothing mysterious, just a wild growing horseradish near a small mound in the middle of nowhere (quite scenic middle of nowhere, yet still middle of nowhere :P)
So impressed with your pronunciation. I only listen and read on these topics. Then when I try to talk about them, I realize I can’t pronounciate sheet. No matter how many times I practice in my head.
There is a very solid chance I’m still not quite correct to be fair 😅
I have watched Ancient Apocalypse by myself and then watched Milo's critique of it, so seeing your perspective is very instructive. Can't wait for Part 2
I wish they would do a collaboration episode
I really think they could build on each others knowledge
Milo's coverage was so fun and insightful. He didn't bring up the history of Hancock being slandered though, which definitely informs why the man is so against mainstream. Lots of layers to this situation, and I'm glad Lore Lodge brought up that surrounding context to continue the conversation.
@@clayxros576 milos coverage was terrible and biased. the amount of evidence he ignores is mindboggling
@@mykjones2
His coverage was also, very openly, a pure sensationalized flame-storm. Milo fully stated as such in the finale, and expressed dissatifaction with that form of content.
It's totally fine to not like his coverage, but to call it terrible is taking it as something it isn't. Biased, feel free. Terrible? That one is up to taste considering it was intended as a bashing not a critique.
Milo is a bad faith actor and is completely biased.
In relation to the underwater pilars, there is some fascinating stuff on certain types of Coral, that grow into metal rich stone at the molecular level and erode it away, which were in the same family tree as the coral that was on these pilars. The conditions and temperature of this water, with the timeline we're assuming with meltwater pulse 1B, it's totally possible those were pilars that have just become coral now. I'm not sure the right way to know for sure, but it definitely muddies the water on what we already know. Even inorganic matter will be consumed by the sea in scarily fast timescales.
I was thinking something like this when he mentioned the coral.. I mean what is coral but life that archors down and feeds away at shit. Both from minerals in the water and what they're on, kind of like fungi. So what if the underwater pillares were just down there so long and it was such a good meal for the coral where they just had to eat away at it and leave us with nothing.
What if there were more pillars buried in the sea floor away from things that would eat it away.. Just a thought.
Anyone who has ever kept a saltwater aquarium can definitively say, certain corals can be extremely invasive. I had the same train of thought when hearing the columns were coral throughout; perhaps the coral grew around another structure that has since eroded away or been consumed by the invertebrates.
My thought on the coral columns was 'huh, I wonder if coral can completely absorb the structure it's growing on and if that would explain the shape of this particular coral'.
I wonder if there are examples of coral elsewhere that are in this shape or if there's a way to find out from the coral itself what things it...( ate..? absorbed?) in its lifetime.
The fact that the Titanic couldn't be raised after 100 years for preservation's a good testament to this fact. They tried to finally get it uncovered fully, but the moment any bit of it touched the air, it literally disintegrated. It's why that area's an International Ban Zone for anyone trying to look at it or loot or anything. Let the dead rest.
This was a surprisingly fair critique of the subject matter. I'm relatively new to the channel, so I'm just not used to a lot of objectivity when it comes to stuff like this. It seems like a vast majority of people are too often cheerleaders for their chosen side, and cease to think critically or objectively about anything not coming from their team, so to speak. I guess what I'm saying is I'm really glad i found this channel, late though i am to the party.
You're exactly right, people tend to automatically go with the people who have the most titles.
It's nice to see someone else that appreciates the patient and fair approach taken in this video. It's getting rarer and rarer to see nowadays.
True objectivity and balanced analysis are so rare these days; this channel is a breath of fresh air. I'm so glad I found you guys.
I surely didn't expect Cholula to show up in the video. I used to ride my bike to the Cholula Pyramid every day. Yes, the pyramid just looks like a hill but they got tunnels that were digged a long time ago where you can still see the original pyramid blocks and murals. It's weird that not many know or care about this structure!
Archaeological projects over in the Near East seem to get the majority of the interest, it’s unfortunate because it’s a lot to do with assumptions about Native American cultures being younger due to the Clovis First dogma.
A bit off topic, yet relates… love the hot sauce
@@TheLoreLodge but clovis-first is disproven for years, isn't it? shouldn't the consensus shift already?
@@wyolaskan1868 valentina better and way cheaper. Go for the extra hot black label one
Thanks for being more obsessed with being right over being mainstream or anti mainstream. Really good quality.
The most annoying thing when this came out was people taking any angle to say "you disagree with ---? Then you're one of them and you dont want people to know they're right."
Everything is racist, EVERYTHING.
In today's world according to Democrats/liberals EVERYTHING is racist.
Never forget this, if you do, well then you are racist.
All I can day about Atlantis is, Troy was once considered an allegory until it was found. Babylon was considered a myth until it was found. Sodom and Gomorrah were considered fictional until they were recently discovered.
@Vitaly Vakhteev not conclusively, no. There is a theory that the sites of Bab edh-Dhra and Numiera correspond to the biblical Sodom and Gomorrah. Another possible location is Tall el-Hammam. A few others have been proposed as well through history, but none of them have been definitively confirmed to be Sodom or Gomorrah.
@@iincidious the large amount of nuclear glass at the site suggests it is, yes.
@limepierre1671 there is a general consesus considering they are where they were said to be. The only thing truly disputed is whether or not there was an impact that destroyed them. Early signs show yes.
Its crazy to me the more people in the West move away from religion the more we find that alot of the bible is actually quite historical.
Atlantis i think was a full civilization not a single city. It represents pre-flood civilization and most the sites dating that old are impressive compared to up until the bronze age.
@@SamtheIrishexan there is most definitely not a concensus, general or otherwise. Numerous sites have been proposed over the years, none have been widely accepted as being either Sodom or Gomorrah. More people accept the impact theory for Tall el-Hamman than the suggestion that out was the site of Sodom, because we have physical evidence of an impact event taking place there while the evidence for it being Sodom is that if you don't think about it too hard and push really hard on the pieces it sort of resembles a badly remembered biblical event.
Babylon was never considered a myth and anyone who believes this nonsense clearly just ignores all the thousands of samples of ancient dna evidence
This is hands down my favorite episode yet, can't wait for part 2!
I just wanna thank Wendigoon for introducing me to this channel. And want to thank Aidan for quality content.
I've actually pushed the idea of crowdfunding dig sites - they really need to monetize it and have people pay for archeology vacations where they come to help dig.
Would require regulations and oversight to keep artifacts safe but could allow shovels for hire which is really what is needed
One problem is that just going to town with shovels is not very good “digging.” It’s very regimented, meticulous, and incredibly boring most of the time. The average tourist attempting to help might well hinder or destroy important work.
I'm willing to crowdfund archaeology expeditions for things like these; though I imagine tourists would only break artefacts and bother the archaeologists.
Holy moly... Id really really love now for you squared Aidan to make another podcast with Milo so you three could talk about it more, now when you did so much research no topic, as last time you had him as a guest you decided to not talk about stuff you know not that much about with is very commendable and i respect you so much because of all your integrity. Great video man as always, ill finish it tomorrow... I knew i couldnt do it today but had to click it anyhow, as always. Keep up the great work. You really make my days shine with excitement.
I think what is most interesting about his hypothesis, at its the basest level, is that it's built from the idea that there are huge blindspots in archaeology. As someone who studied anthropology and archaeology, lots of the big tenents of those disciplines aren't questioned, when they really should be constantly evolving as our understandings evolve. (Imo alot of those tenents are built on weird assumptions based on "modern" ideas of gender and religion, which traps them in a very narrow box of interpretations...) Not to mention, to say that a culture was able to slip through the cracks doesnt seem out of the realm of possibility given that small percentage of the earth that we have studied and the specific circumstances that must exist for achaeological artifacts and sites to be preserved. Does this mean that all the conclusions Hancock extrapolates outward from his study are a more complete or perfect explaination, not really. But I dont think that questioning the status quo of human history is something we shouldn't be doing.
Don't know if anyone has said this yet and i know you haven't watched any of Milo's videos on ancient apocalypse yet but Milo does address graham being banned from serpent mound, turns out Graham Hancock was not banned from there, he just wasn't allowed to film there, what really happened was Graham requested for four days commercial filming at serpent mound and the people In charge of serpent mound didn't like the idea of a large film crew running around their important historical site for four days so they denied his request, he totally could have gone there whenever he wanted, he just couldn't bring his film crew.
thats the only research milo did for the entire set of videos. He is another example of archeology completely ignoring the actual evidence in favor of just attacking graham. I am far from agreeing with everything graham says but there are so many bad facts and weird coincidences and ignored evidence that its really frustrating.
Milo is very type A competitive and saw Hancock garnering attention so jumped on the band wagon for some attention prostitution. He's a smart guy but he's too young and too heavily indoctrinated to actually take any more serious than your local librarian.
@@mykjones2My dude what, half of what evidence graham used was found through improperly using a test like carbon dating on rocks (that's not how carbon dating works) or complete speculation
@@notthefbi7015yall are so uneducated dunning kruger has eaten your brain
@notthefbi7015 u can't carbon date stone. And hancock has never done this. Pure bs
What I got out of this is that archaeologists are about 5 minutes from murdering each other over funding at any given time.
Since Plato was discussing a thirdhand travel story that took place thousands of years in the past, I think we should take it as an allegory, no matter how shiny a theory it is.
The term "Atlantis" is usually used to describe a general theory of a lost civilization, rather than a literal belief in Plato's story as hard fact. Atlantis-like flood/catastrophe stories are a global phenomenon, but Plato's account is the best known and most often quoted. Having said that, Plato himself did insist that this particular story was not mere allegory but had the advantage of being based on something real. He goes to great lengths to explain that the sinking of Atlantis was not an isolated event, but a single example of a series of catastrophes that had befallen humanity, resulting a series of "restarts" for the development of civilization.
The example of Doggerland (a very real lost continent within relatively recent times) springs to mind.
I think what's important to remember is he doesn't need to be 100% right. He could be 10% right and its still a big discovery. His first episodes, Malta, and the turkey sites are his best
Idk how accurate hancocks claims are, however that same thought applies to mainstream and alternative science as well. We have such a gap in our knowledge of the past that it would foolish and arrogant of any of us to assume we can definitively state the truth of what existed or occured in those MASSIVE chunks of time in history that we have little to no record of. All I know is that the findings that are constantly being unearthed are throwing all kinds of wrenches into all kinds of established theories and I genuinely believe our history books are more innacurate than anybody would care to admit.
There are so many in STEM fields in content creation lacking your balanced critical analysis. It's much appreciated to find a content creator with an approach like this.
Well done sir.
Schliemann blew up Troy. I’ve been there. He excavated using dynamite. The entire landscape as far as the eye can see is pocked by holes from dynamite.
Actually, if you look closely you will see that was where Achilles was clapping Patroclus' cheeks.
This one oughtta be good
The chamber under Gunung Padang is way less mysterious than Graham may think. The thing is, that hill is an extinct volcano, and so there are going to be lava tubes and lava chambers that may look like man-made structures on a GPR. I support excavating there, but the overwhelming possibility is that this is a feature of geologic interest, not anthropological (my undergrad was dual poli/earth science and my grad program focused on disaster preparedness and hardening). Also, most of Gunung Padang is natural, despite the strange shape of the columnar jointing. If you want to see a giant version of that sort of natural structure, look up the "Devil's Tower" (seen in Close Encounters of a Third Kind). Humans may have moved the columns around, but there was very little alteration of the natural materials present in that site.
Devil's Tower is actually a stump of the world tree smart guy.
Your last name Hawass?
Exactly. Humans built someone on the volcano - it is cool they did so; but they didn't build the mountain itself. They took advantage of the columnar basalt on the mountain.
What you are saying is nonsense. This is not anything like Devils tower. It's a man made structure, that is over 25,000 years old. That is just how it is.
@@jamesn.economou9922 That would be cool - how are they getting to a 25K years ago date? There is no method for dating when stone was cut or laid, organic matter can be dated, but the vast majority of organic matter isn't indicative of human activity. Have archeologist (or whoever is excavating the site) found hearths, or post molds that can be dated? I know that the ground penetrating radar indicates some voids in the mountain. But the mountain is a volcano, so lava tubes or extinct magma chambers would be expected. I don't think any attempt has been made to dig down to these voids. Unfortunately their shapes do not indicate human activity - ground penetrating radar isn't very high res. Without more data it is impossible to say. I'm sure they are collecting more data on this site. Currently I think the 25K data is a little extreme. The current date for human activity on Gunung Padang about 1,500 years ago. No doubt there were people there earlier doing their thing. But were they members of a global "advanced civilization" so far, no evidence of that that I've seen.
Graham Hancock is really smart and has made many discoveries including the Bosnian pyramid. I don’t agree with everything he has to say but he’s at least asking the right questions. Most in his field shut out those same questions, close their eyes and put their fingers in their ears.
Thank you so much for making these kinds of videos. I can't stand people that sit there and only make attacks on character it's insufferable. You actually go out of your way to find whatever facts are available and I love that.
Congrats on the best opening line to date. Well said. Well done.
I watched the excellent series on this by Miniminuteman, but i was very excited to see you did an episode on it too.
This was a breath of fresh air. Milo, as smart as he is, is far too type A and (proudly) heavily indoctrinated in order to take any more serious than a Google search. He's got the right textbook answer and he can back it as long as you don't ask serious questions that he can't find a way to mock 😂
Cool guy though, he's got fire!
@@entrepreneursfinestliterally every claim Milo made was backed by research and evidence. Unlike Hancock
@@brettkilian9855Like the "research and evidence" that created the dogma behind Clovis first and literally took finding 22,000 year old footprints in a layer of stone in New Mexico that they couldn't argue against to admit they were stupid??
Modern "archeology" is unable to deal with anything that doesn't fit the narrative they push - no matter how unfulfilling or ludicrous their narrative happens to be. Hancock may be wrong on a lot of things, but at least he doesn't get his ideas from book worms who've rarely left their university and have no practical real world experience.
@@brettkilian9855 from consuming a lot of his work in the last year after watching this very same video, Hancock comes across, at least in my opinion, just as much as asking questions as he is making definitive claims, especially with just how much he's changed his approach through the decades, some of the questions are kind of stupid, sure, and the claims are outlandish, and Hancock certainly comes across as full of himself and slightly patronizing at times, but why do academic archaeologist have a right to be that way and the dude doesn't?
We need more billionaire archeologists to fund some mother lovin digs!!
Unfortunately those billionaires are in special clubs of people who like to withhold knowledge from common folk it would make it much harder to control the populace if they knew about there past basically keep us docile especially now with so many inventions like the tv and the internet now they can control the mind completely
Yay to the message about education over trying to sound cool by dragging someone else down while your only explanation is "why?because". It's a relatively common sight in articles which is frankly sad, having the writers waste less time on coming up with ways to call someone names for an opinion that hurts nobody and instead put that time towards explaining exactly why they think that opinion isn't accurate would make finding a good article so much easier.
"Get your act together" Precisely. I don't know a single history professional who agrees on every single thing. it's the way you end up in a church, everyone OVERALL agrees. But I guarantee every single one of them has a specific experience or hypothesis about how religion actually functions and that personal paradigm has them thinking some really odd, but specific things compared to what everyone else nods over. Was Judas a bad guy? Manipulated by fate? That alone can split entire congregations in a weaker religion.
Science is no different. Personal theories, pet ideas, and word of mouth creates bias, and eventually the weight is enough to pull the whole cart over.
As an amateur archaeologist (college trained, w/o finishing my degree), I think Hancock asks all of the right questions. I think he jumps to a lot of conclusions that can be easily disputed. In the end, the idea of older civilizations isn't far-fetched or even hard to believe in. More and more evidence keeps showing up. All we can reasonably expect from the scientific community is honest exploration into ideas and diligent evaluation of evidence (both physical and mythological).
Every one has intelligent opinions on your video, all I have to say is thank you for not obnoxiously sipping coffee every time you start a point, thank you for not talking down to the viewers and thank you for talking in a non rushed/yelling manner. I think every one knows who’s 3 part video I’m talking about
Sorry! 4 part
Brilliant video, love the look into the meta aspects of what went on with these researchers. Things like funding and politics don't occur to me when I read about archeology but they have a big impact on the field
Science isn't the pursuit of truth, it is the pursuit of funding. Even scientists have to eat and pay bills, so they get results that please the people who give them grants. Sad but true.
This was so nerdy! I love that you’re enthusiastic and thorough in your research. 💐👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾
I’m a pretty new follower, but this is fast becoming my favorite channel to watch. I’m low-key addicted to good storytelling and folklore - as in, I’m the only person I’ve ever met who geeks out over Zecharia Sitchin’s translations, even if they’re hard to read. Those Sumerian gods were an absolute font of storytelling material and I cannot get enough. And the crossovers into pretty much every middle eastern culture that followed - including all the abrahamic traditions - it’s just magic! So finding this channel with such a strong grasp on the art of good storytelling is just a breath of fresh air ♥️
Thank you for covering this. Ive been fascinated by Hancocks theory for a couple years now, i actually read his recent book Magicians of the Gods, and until the Netflix show, I never heard anyone talk about Hancock or the theory except on Joe Rogan.
Archeology in Mexico is neither cheap or safe anymore. There are reasons many north American archeologists don't touch it. Most of us don't want to deal with the corruption and cartels
If the government would regulate, decriminalize and/or Legalize drugs the cartels would become unemployed and powerless, solving this issue along with countless others…..
You’ve never gotten funding stfu
People don't realize how expensive that really is not only to get there get workers get all the paperwork from the government start a dig get harassed by the cartel pay them off only to repeat a month later while you have to pay all the archeologists paleontologists and all the workers and for security or the cartel it adds up fast unfortunately 😢
But I'm just drunk so what do I know
The underground structure in Indonesia needs to be explored, its like finding an unmolested version of the great pyramid with all its interior and mysteries intact. Its insane that things like that aren't persued, are these people not curious or are they actively trying to hide something?
All and all , a very well articulated and balanced video
Kudos
His main genesis of interest in ancient oral traditions and the validity of legends was his time spent as a journalist covering a story in Ethiopia. While there, he was told of the local belief that the Ethiopian church possess the ark of the covenant. The same oldest church still active which continues to includes the original apocryphal Texts in it's bible like the book of Enoch and others, unlike the other Christian churches that removed them at the council of nicea. This was worth investigating deeper to Mr Hancock and led to other unorthodox research that counters the mainstream narratives of our history of civilization.
Hancock's wife, who he dearly loves is brown and he has mixed raced children.
Anyone who entertains the idea that he's racist for even a minute needs to pull their head out
sorry, but bad argument. J.D. Vance, the american republican vice presidential candidate is a total religious white nationalist, but his wife is from...india i believe, and all his children are of course mixed. Not saying hankock is racist, just saying your argument is bad.
@@dyamonde9555 how is my argument bad?
What tf does JD Vance have to do with Graham Hancock?
Racist people don't fall in love, marry and make babies with the people they're accused of hating. Hancock gives Kudos to his wife every speech.
If you're trying to compare Hancock to Vance you've been on the Internet WAY too long and need to unplug & take a walk
@@GreenTea3699 i made very clear that i was not saying that hancock is racist. i said that JD Vance, a clear racists, also very clearly married an ethnic woman and had kids with her. So simply having an ethnic wife and kids is no indicator if someone is or is not a racist, thus your argument is invalid.
@@dyamonde9555 what does JD Vance have to do with anything? Dude put down the pipe. You've got issues
@@GreenTea3699 my only issue is that you dont understand how argumentation and counterpoints work. Your original argument does not work because your fact does not indicate your conclusion. Vance is simply my counter-example to showcase this. If you still don't understand what i'm trying to say here i can not help you.
this is one of the deepest rabbit holes ever. 3 years in and i still havent found the bottom
I've been at it for about 40 years. I've seen academics claim credit for stuff they ridiculed as nonsense many times over during that time. The rabbit hole has no bottom because it is still under construction and always will be!
@Martin Harris Randall is that you? Haha. That is so true though
@@MysticalPolymath No I'm not Randall! He is a friend of a friend though, but that's about as close an association as i can claim, lol!
Pride, politics, money, and a few other things are a few of the problems in the academic field of archeology. And probably most academic fields.
Ya. It does not help that most high schools that have textbooks from 30-50 years ago and some of the finer points are wrong or misleading causing confusion when people talk about history and archeological with the people that are updated on history and archeological
ABSOLUTELY MY FRIEND ❣️❣️❣️
And all commercial ones
It was never about his specific ideas he put forth but the fact he puts forth the idea of not just blindly believing the experts, because that is inherently bad science.
Remember, truth and accuracy have no meaning when you can call someone names and falsely attack their character...lol...you hit the nail on the head...AGAIN!!! Love your videos and your presentation! Keep it rollin guys!
Last I remember I was taught that do to nutrition and the amount of food available, we have grown in height. Is it possible that the Giants having knowledge of farming, were better fed and just grew to something closer to modern height?
That's more believable than actual giants that weren't human. I'd say it's because of how mundane the idea is compared to the extraordinary ones.
Ive always thought their was a pre history that either isnt known or isnt spoken about.
1. Inca walls built on foundations that are a lot older with no knowledge of when or who built them, they are massive and workmanship unsurpassed in engineering.
2. Inca walls that are made from differnt shape solid blocks of stone that all fit individually together with at the end of one of the walls the rock has liquified as if somehow these wall builders melted with some extreme heat technique the massive stones together.
Yes that's exactly what it looks like happened. I can't see how they could get stone's of that size up there. Just can't see primitive tools doing such work. It may never be known. Fascinating
Since Atlantis is mentioned, I am going to propose a new theory: Plato created the story of Atlantis through stories such as the flood which could have originated when lands in Meospotamia were flooded at the end of the ice age, hence the idea of a lost land that was flooded.
except we know that plato was made aware of the story of atlantis from solon , who had heard it directly from elders in the egypt area. plato has never once been known to fabricate storys either. perhaps atlantis is an alegory for a great many coastal cities which were submerged when the water level rose by 130 meters in a matter of years ,around 11,600 years ago. we find evidence of the cities all the time of the coasts of japan, cuba, india and on and on
It's more likely based on the minoan eruption event, that destroyed the Island of Thera (circa 1600BC) and may have been one of the main contributors to the Bronze Age collapse.
@@mainsource8030 What Graham Hancock often omits on the intro of Ancient Apocalypse is that the story of Atlantis isn't even a first hand account from Plato. The story is narrated by his fictional character named Critias. This omission puts way more historical credit in the story than it's due, since Graham makes it seem that Plato himself is relaying the story, not a fictional character.
@@ne0nmancer Critias was not a fictional character but was a politician from 5 century BC whose linage is well documented, your omission of this basic research would suggest you have never read Plato's original account. Critias's grandson is the Ciritias from Plato's account recounting a story his grandfather had told him came from Solon. It does not make the story true but do not make up facts to support your ideas
Theory implies evidence. Whatcha got?
If people are interested in Hancock's work, I deeply recommend his appearances on Joe Rogan together with Randall Carlson. Joe is obviously a big fan and he lets them have plenty of space to go into incredible details. They also did a debate with Michael Shermer who is a skeptic, and I think it's very good content. The Netflix series was a disappointment to me, because it reminded me more of those History Channel Ancient Alien episodes where they focused on creating hype instead of documenting their ideas. The Joe Rogan episodes are superior in my opinion, whether you agree with him or not.
"Giants"
-- Wendigoon has entered the chat.
@TheLoreLodge could you guys please do a video or podcast episode about South African folklore
They will need to get someone MUCH more familiar with that folklore to guest with them, IMO. I think it would be really cool if they had someone on the podcast and maybe cover some specific ~ nuance~ that isn't obvious in translation.
It has come out the serpent mound people only told Grant no, because he wanted to film for 4 days and they felt it would cause too much of a disruption. Graham has not given evidence that they didn't like his view being the true was the true reason that I could find. Watch miniminuteman or Stefan Milo's on ancient apocalypse they both talk about it.
Wish more professionals within the many fields of science held your inquisitive nature
I feel like a lot of the archeological community just are there to preserve a narrative. They dont want to be wrong. Which seems like mafness as archeology is about exploration and finding new knowledge which of course will change our preexisting notions again and again. Isnt tgat what learning and science is?. People thought the earth was flat.. science changed ( ignoring flat earthers ) .. it changed.. we learned.. we grew
The problem with Hancock is that he starts with his conclusion and only goes looking for evidence that supports it while ignoring (or reinterperating in his favor) evidence that contradicts it. That's why he's correct about some stuff while being wildly wrong about other things.
This is a great way to put it.
absolutely this! I would even argue that this same methodology has plagued archaeology for years, and is only recently changing. it's fine to have a question, but you can't really start with an answer, unless you are actively seeking all evidence that proves your idea either right or wrong.
I dont think so..there are enough Evidenzes liying around..to conlude it was that way
The problem with all over mainstream archeologists is that they do that too, but for their mainstream timeline.
Gotta admit though, that guy is really fun to hear talk.
I love you guy’s opening 😂😂😂😂
Giants might just be a matter of perspective. An advanced civilization would have likely had better more consistent nourishment than a group of of hunter-gathers who would be more likely to deal with famine. Regular famine makes groups of people smaller while consistent nutrient rich foods and good health care generally makes people taller.
I thought I’d say, this is a very credible video. I like the laidback feel of your videos but this genuinely seemed like it was made by a professional (as you claim to be). Kudos.
Being allowed to dig around areas with great historical/cultural significance is a priviledge not a right. Historically a lot of destruction has been done by archeologists and film crews
Except that their statement specifically referred to Grahams beliefs/theories, in addition to such things as film crews. The latter might be a concern and steps can be done to mitigate such, the former is intolerable and has no place within a discourse.
@@darklelouchg8505 they didn't allow it for both reasons and both reasons are valid.
It's an ancient burial mound, you treat those with respect and if you don't then you don't get the privilege of going there.
I think most people would be pretty unhappy about people going to their family cemetery and making a documentary about how it was actually the cemetery atlantas, that isn't respectful
your videos have been keeping me sane during my alevel exams! much love, the videos you put out are consistently amazing :DD
Don’t you guys just love how political campaigns can interfere with archaeological discovery and learning about our history?
Don’t you guys love how a sociologist from England thinks he knows more than actual archeologists about archeology?
Hearing the Indonesia case just makes me wonder why I ever had an interest in being an Archeologist at one point.
I was an Anthropology student specifically studying to do archaeology, because we’ve lumped it in with Anthropology as a field. And they crushed my dreams. I love archaeology, and I still love the authentic work that comes from it. But today’s archaeologists in the US are hypocritical and elitist, they sacrifice the truth for political narratives, and shoot themselves in the feet constantly. (The anthropologists I studied under even literally taught false information.) Even when they are correct about a hypothesis being wrong, they say so in the vilest, most destructive ways. Just so people don’t think I’m kooky like they also think Hancock is, I wrote a paper on a discredited hypothesis suggesting the existence of an additional land path over ice that Stone Age people could have crossed from Europe into North America. I read the reports and the counter arguments, and it ultimately *did* appear to be incorrect, but the fucking archaeologists sperged out angrily as if no one should dare think such things, and *also* claimed racism too. I did some lab work cleaning bulk samples and had to listen to other students laugh at Hancock, AND call him a white supremacist, AND suggest he deserved to be punched, TO OUR PROFESSOR, who just laughed and passively agreed. They bitched all the time how they didn’t get enough funding and weren’t taken seriously as a science. Maybe they should act like scientists first to deserve it. They aren’t scientists. They’re activists and aristocrats.
Remember a sociology class I took. There was a paper due on "environmental racism", the practice of shuffling off undesired minorities to the worst places to live, one of the key examples being Flint Michigan's undrinkable water.
The professor was disgusted when I presented him with the objective data that showed that poor water quality--charitably defined as those with worse water quality than Flint, were almost entirely, north of 80%, were disproportionately white compared to the national racial breakdown according the the, at the time, brand new census.
@kilbert666 Many historians and scientists don't care about the truth anymore, they care about funding and following the popular narrative.
It also annoys me how much American politics in specific effect the treatment of history.
@@kilbert666 Oh, no. You're getting hung up on real data instead of forwarding this week's popular propaganda. I don't think you'll make it in academia.
I truly wish I could like this video twice! The whole reason I watch your channel can be summed up in the last 10 minutes of this video. GO GET 'EM! hahaha. Great video, glad I watched it. Can't wait to see part 2.
Look up mysterious artifacts found in coal mines. coins cast aluminum some weird stuff super old. Just a thought along my own lines of research
My son found something strange, something that shouldn’t have been therein a stream in Northern Kentucky when he was about five years old, flooding may explain it, over the years it disappeared, stolen? Anyway we also found some weird fossils, Aiden, you remind me of him, I believe y’all would be friends, he and his brother both have insatiable appetites for learning, thanks so very much for giving me a way to learn more about my world, take care…
Very well done. I’m impressed with the amount of research you’ve been putting into these videos
You should have a look at what miniminuteman did on this, I found it entertaining if not the best we got
I love your information, and humorous way you tell the tale
46:39 did Graham actually say the great pyramid is a tomb? This is suprising to me because iirc he was the first person to bring it to my attention that there is almost no evidence to support it being a tomb.
I know where you are coming from with your comment- I began to question all my accepted beliefs that were being validated by modern scientific methods when I considered that my Dad's medical conditions were producing "affirmative" results in blood tests, but not the underlying causes. Lots of blood tranfusions to treat the symptoms. Myelodysplastic Syndrome basically was failure of the red bood cells to mature to functional levels before being released into the blood stream. The science does 'catch up' but most of us ordinary folk usually opt to wear dust masks on account of we give up on speculating about what mainstream science doesn't yet know.
I am a Hancock fan and i felt that this was a very fair analysis of his work. Hancock is open to discussions. Maybe you could reach out to him and have him on the show?
hancock fan = brainlet
@@janeistired3921 ok bud. How about you form a real sentence so people can take your clown ass seriously.
Archaeology is turning out to be similar to medical science. Go against the legacy beliefs and they will handle open minds with “show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.”
Hey, love your videos. Just one thing I wanted to note: meso American pyramids were commonly built upon older pyramids...it seemed to be standard practice. I remember seeing the layers when I visited said pyramid as a kid.
Too many scientists these days think with their egos instead of their logic and stick to scientific dogma instead of exploring possibilities.
I want to see a discussion/debate between Milo and Graham hosted on the lore lodge. That would be an amazing episode
Minute Milo or whatever his name is?
I hate that dude. He comes off as "what I say is right don't research or try to prove me wrong" kind of a hindrance to the scientific method.
The few shorts I've seen about miniminuteman in his analysis of Hancock's claims has used a lot of insults and he has a very unlikable attitude. I don't think milo could handle a debate with any sort of professionalism.
@@trustworthydan fr Milo believes his 4 years of university automatically make him more qualified than someone who’s spent 30 years of his life researching this topic, visiting the sites in person, and talking to professionals about the subject. He’s charismatic but is the definition of an appeal to authority
@@CameronRoser-Peetyour argument is an appeal to authority…
Could be that Tuatha de Dannan were the last members of the precursors that survive the Great Flood. And they were the last "people" who wielded magic?
He's a racist but has a black wife. Gotta love how people can't stand opinions any more. If someone has a different opinion on a subject, attack them! If you're not intelligent enough to debate an issue, just call them a racist or a phobic.
The whole "what the academy knew" section is whats turned me off of history and mythology, it seems these days people are more focuesed on pushing their personal beliefs about history, rather than what is true.
There is this sence of superiority I get from a lot of historians these days, they think that the work of them and their peers is worth more than that of others, it's also funny how they call Graham a white supremacist, while ignoring completely the archaeological work of a south asian man.
My problem with graham Hancock is that, even though, statistically, he could be correct about what he’s saying, he provides no evidence for his claims and chooses to side with them anyway, instead of the more widely accepted narrative which is far more substantiated. It’s not about wanting to suppress this non conformist thinker or anything, it’s just that the widely accepted narrative is widely accepted because we have overwhelming evidence in favor of it, whilst the ancient apocalypse narrative has circumstantial evidence at best
Dude...he's not an archeologist. Its not his job to go out and find evidence. Graham will be the first to tell you that he's a writer and a journalist. He's looking at evidence and making hypotheses. It's the science establishment that won't consider them even though they're often wrong about things.
The "widely accepted narrative" has been proven to either be wrong or severely lacking.
Newly found your channel- binging and enjoying it so far! Everything I see about Hancock is either bashing him, or agreeing with everything he says. One extreme or the other. It’s refreshing to see a fair, unbiased (and thoroughly researched) view of this subject. People don’t have to be right, or wrong about everything .
Milo, or Miniminuteman actually went through all of his points. Check out his 4 part series about the actual evidence that's brought up. Graham Hamcock also wasn't entirely banned from the site, he just wasn't allowed to film there.
Bro woke up and chose justice.
Thank you for providing quality content. Keep being you
Love your work. Love Hancock and I think you are very fair! Well argued…
Graham does not say that the pyramids are tombs, in fact he states the opposite. He does not think they are tombs.
The accusations are based on the fact that a legend claimed a south american god had a very biblical style beard that natives don't usually have.
So that implied that this mythical figure was from another ethnic group not native to American continent.
Ah yes. The giants are thought to have had red hair and fair skin, and the annunaki (ancient aliens) are supposed to be who the giants are. At least one Pharoah they DNA tested had red hair and fair skin
Um why couldn't people build structures out of coral?
I dunno, wizards?
Once upon a time science and academics had the humbleness to accept we don't know everything and studying was an ongoing infinite process and knowledge was fluid.
Now, they are like medieval church screaming heresy every time a new idea or discovery comes about.
If you have not i very strongly urge you
to watch miniminuteman's breakdown of ancient apocalypse for a detailed and frankly quite entertaining look at Hancock from an archeological perspective
An issue with the narrative itself that is proposed in this situation is ; the falsification process.
A proper scientifically trained team of individuals would attempt this before presentation of their ideas to the scientific community as they'll be doing this as well for peer review.
This not being part of the whole process with Graham's hypothesis is it's Achilles' heel.
Among other things and skipping parts doesn't add legitimacy to the story he's trying to tell realistically.
Its a neat idea, one that needs alot of work to flesh out. As it goes unnoticed by the viewers because we're ignorant to aspects that go on behind the scenes that lead to independent sources agreeing or not with these conclusion and concepts.
An improperly formed hypothesis won't survive the storm of peer review.
Perhaps we won't ever know but, it's definitely interesting.
Good to hear an open minded take on this topic. Thank you
The diatribe about that Alex Griffin hack was absolutely amazing and took the whole video to the next level.
Alex Griffin is an absolute zilch who was so obviously pandering to his group for approval that it was sickening. I hope he fails unless he expands his mindset and focuses more on actually doing his job.
Just found your channel. Excellent research and unbiased analysis.